I'm sure many of you have heard the scuttlebutt:
"...Microsoft told ComputerWire it would provide technical assistance to
Ximian Inc in its work on the Mono Project, to develop a version of .NET
for Linux and Unix using open source development..."
If not then get a load of this:
http://www.softwareuncovered.com/news/cgram-20010716.html#1
Let me state for the record that I'm of the opinion that microsoft is a
criminal organization engaged in vandalism, destruction of property,
extortion, racketeering, and bribery. I also think .net is a bad idea
whose sole purpose is to lock people into microsoft products. My
experience with microsoft's "technical assistance" has given me a new
and profoundly deep understanding of the word "useless". No one hates
microsoft and all it's HORRENDOUSLY CRAPPY products more than me.
NOTHING good comes from microsoft.
...BUT...
In all fairness, I must ask the question: How is creating an open
source version of .net (Mono) -- with or without microsoft's help --
different from creating an open source version of microsoft networking (
Samba ) complete with all microsoft's non-compliant SMB extensions?
My guts heave at the idea of a .net for Linux but then where would we be
today without Samba? Didn't Samba PREVENT people from being locked into
microsoft products for file and print services? Could Mono be another
Samba?
Ed "recoiling from the loud bang as he presses the send button" Centanni
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:07:32 EDT